(Sources are based on original requests - these may be updated, please check with me. Some sources are still pending choice/approval.)

Congratulations to everyone who made the cut! My apologies to anyone who didn't. Believe me when I say I had to make some tough calls all-round. There were at least a half dozen people that I was still adamant on wanting to try and fit in but I just had to keep making cuts. Eventually there were only so many people who could fit in.

Track 13 (originally 14) got absolutely no requests so I snagged it for myself.

BUT WAIT (you say) THERE WERE 18 TRACKS BEFORE!

This is true. HOWEVER, part of the delay in track listings was that there were some adjustments made in the middle in terms of timing. The original listing had:

After seeing the people who were competing for those two parts of the climax of song 3 (tracks 9 and 10) I eventually came to the conclusion that I would roll those two tracks together. So, as you can see in the new and improved track listings above, track 8 has been extended by 19 seconds, and track 9 now starts 19 seconds later and continues to the end of track 10. Timing for tracks 0-7 is unchaged. Timing for tracks 11 to 17 have also been unchanged (they are now just a number earlier than previously).

If you're not sure then download the WAV listed above and re-listen! WAVs start and end exactly 5 seconds before and after your 'cut off' point of your track. This is to remind you of what's happening before and after your track to keep in mind how you're going to close off your track and transition into the next.

TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBOURS (Heck, talk to everyone)

Get involved. You are on this project because you have convinced me of your editing prowess and that you can make the track you have been given your own. As I have stated a million times (and will state a million times more) no singular editor makes RoS great. The success of RoS has always been dependant on the overall flow of the project and the editors working together to make the best possible transitions between tracks and to maintain some kind of familiarity. Start talking to the other editors in the project. Start talking to your track neighbours. Get an idea of what other people are going to do and figure out how to make your track your own, while also keeping it a part of the whole.

SPEAKING OF NEIGHBOURS

As of this moment RoS:LA is a closed system. Please do not share any betas (yours or otherwise) to anyone outside of the project. With previous projects sometimes it has been the case that betas have been in free-flow within the community and so widely shared that when the final project is released there aren't many great suprises. I, and hopefully you, would love to totally blow away the community upon the release of this project by providing them with 17 incredible tracks that they have thus far been unable to see. Sharing within the project is 100% encouraged as there are no better people to give you feedback than those who are working with you. If you have existing 'support structures' in terms of beta viewing please refrain from sharing any of your project files and betas with them for the time being. It is my hope that this will also help to improve the comradery between the editors on the project.

However, this may change in future. As stated above I'm doing this in hopes to improve relations between editors in the project as well as keeping the community in the dark until we can unveil it in all it's glory. If we get to the point where it doesn't seem necessary this may be lifted.

This will ultimately boil down to the final opinion of everyone in the project. This is a group effort, and I don't want to be enforcing a ban if the majority do not agree. However, I think it'd be a fairly neat idea, especially to see the first reactions of people when the final project is released. Have a think on it and let me know your thoughts.

However. Anyone caught sharing another editor's betas without their express approval will be ejected from the project.

Prodigi wrote:After seeing the people who were competing for those two parts of the climax of song 3 (tracks 9 and 10) I eventually came to the conclusion that I would roll those two tracks together. So, as you can see in the new and improved track listings above, track 8 has been extended by 19 seconds, and track 9 now starts 19 seconds later and continues to the end of track 10. Timing for tracks 0-7 is unchaged. Timing for tracks 11 to 17 have also been unchanged (they are now just a number earlier than previously).

You might want to look at those timings again and your list then because something is off. You gave me what I suspect is the old track 16 which i never signed up for. If someone else is supposed to be in that spot then they should since they singed up for it.

Like the AMV .Org App? Think about donating to help me make it better.

wow, it didn't really hit me how lucky i'd be to make it in until i saw that lineup. I figured (hey, who else but kham and joey actually does lamvs anyway? UR A SHOEIN!) but that line up is filled to the brim with amazing editors, it's inspiring and intimidating at the same time, i don't know how to feel! But i think everyone would apprecaite it if i used it to do a good track, so that sounds good.

so, i haven't found a source for this track...and still waiting on an answer for koop's question....so is it cool to use anime? (:ying:)

For those of your using 2.35:1 cinematic sources you may want to consider getting a 1080p copy of your source and cropping this back.

Track selection aside, from a tech standpoint, the frame rate should probably be 23.976 because most of the sources people are using are films and their frame rate is already 23.976 anyway. Anything that's 29.97 is probably interlaced so these people should be IVTCing and decimate down to 23.976 also. Then again, we are using blurays/hd-dvds so no one should have anything that's 29.97 (correct me if I'm wrong). Either way, there's going to be a lot of unnecessary duplication of frames if we all have to convert up to 29.97fps.

The frame size, also looking at it from a film standpoint, I think a lot of them are going to be in cinematic 2.35:1 rather than 16:9 (based on the sources people picked, none of those sources are 16:9). You would want the minority of the sources to be cropped. Although it's my personal preference, i'd rather cut a 16:9 source down to 2.53:1 rather the other way around.

Like the AMV .Org App? Think about donating to help me make it better.

For those of your using 2.35:1 cinematic sources you may want to consider getting a 1080p copy of your source and cropping this back.

Track selection aside, from a tech standpoint, the frame rate should probably be 23.976 because most of the sources people are using are films and their frame rate is already 23.976 anyway. Anything that's 29.97 is probably interlaced so these people should be IVTCing and decimate down to 23.976 also. Then again, we are using blurays/hd-dvds so no one should have anything that's 29.97 (correct me if I'm wrong). Either way, there's going to be a lot of unnecessary duplication of frames if we all have to convert up to 29.97fps.

The frame size, also looking at it from a film standpoint, I think a lot of them are going to be in cinematic 2.35:1 rather than 16:9 (based on the sources people picked, none of those sources are 16:9). You would want the minority of the sources to be cropped. Although it's my personal preference, i'd rather cut a 16:9 source down to 2.53:1 rather the other way around.